Bava Metzia 137

Chapter 137

א אי פלגא בהפסד תרי תילתי באגר
1 or half loss and two thirds profit.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the man on whose behalf R. 'Ilish had traded must be content with this arrangement, either to receive half the profits but to bear two-thirds of the loss, or if R. 'Ilish were to stand half the loss, he must receive two-thirds of the profit. That interpretation had to be put upon the bond. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> R. Kahana said: I repeated this ruling before R. Zebid of Nehardea, whereupon he suggested to me: But perhaps R. 'Ilish had dipped his bread into his vinegar, and R. Nahman has ruled, The <i>halachah</i> is as R. Judah?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That this is sufficient to remove a 50% profit and loss arrangement from the category of usury. ');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ב אמר רב כהנא אמריתא לשמעתא קמיה דרב זביד מנהרדעא ואמר לי דלמא רב עיליש טובל עמו בציר הוה ואמר רב נחמן הלכה כר' יהודה אמר ליה לאו הלכתא איתמר אלא שיטה איתמר
2 — He replied: It was not stated that such is the <i>halachah</i>, but that [all three proceed on the same] principle. That is logical too; for should you not agree thereto, why enumerate the <i>halachah</i> [of every case]? He should have stated, The <i>halachah</i> is as R. Judah, who is the most lenient of all.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Then the rest would have followed automatically. Hence, in fact, such small remuneration is inadequate, and therefore Raba was justified in his assumption. ');"><sup>3</sup></span> Rab said: [If one stipulates, 'Receive] the excess above a third as your remuneration,' it is permitted.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If one gives calves or foals to a breeder on a half profit half loss basis, which, as stated above, is forbidden, but adds that should it appreciate by more than a third of its present value, the excess belongs to the breeder, that constitutes payment, though such appreciation is uncertain. ');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ג הכי נמי מסתברא דאי לא תימא הכי למה ליה למיחשב ולמימר הלכה הלכה לימא הלכה כר' יהודה דמיקל מכולהו
3 But Samuel said: And if there was no excess above a third, shall he go home empty handed?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., such a speculation does not obliterate the character of usury. ');"><sup>5</sup></span> Hence, said Samuel, he must stipulate a <i>denar</i> [for his labour]. Now, is it Rab's opinion that a <i>denar</i> need not be fixed? But Rab said: The calf's head is the breeder's.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If one accepts a calf for fattening on a fifty-fifty basis, he must receive its head in return for his labour, and the rest is shared. ');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ד אמר רב מותר שליש בשכרך הרי זה מותר ושמואל אמר לא מצא מותר שליש ילך לביתו ריקן אלא אמר שמואל קוצץ לו דינר
4 Surely that means that he said to him, 'Receive the excess above a third as your payment'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But as there was no excess, he must receive the calf's head instead, proving that Rab admits that the breeder must receive a definite payment that is independent of speculative appreciation. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> — No. It means that he said to him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [MS.M. rightly omits 'that he said to him.'] ');"><sup>8</sup></span>
ה וסבר רב אין קוצצין לו דינר והאמר רב ריש עגלא לפטומא מאי לאו דאמר ליה מותר שליש בשכרך
5 'Either the excess above a third, or the calf's head for the breeder.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [MS.M. rightly omits 'for the breeder.'] ');"><sup>9</sup></span> Alternatively, when did Rab rule that [a stipulation], 'Receive the excess above a third as your payment,' is permitted, when he [the breeder] has a cow of his own, for people say, 'It is the same whether one mixes fodder for an ox or for oxen.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' No additional labour is entailed, and therefore a speculative arrangement is permitted. ');"><sup>10</sup></span>
ו לא דקאמר ליה אי מותר שליש אי ריש עגלא לפטומא איבעית אימא כי קאמר רב מותר שליש בשכרך מותר כגון דאית ליה בהמה לדידיה דאמרי אינשי גביל לתורא גביל לתורי
6 R. Eleazar of Hagrunia<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [A suburb of Nehardea, Obermeyer, op. cit., p. 265ff.] ');"><sup>11</sup></span> bought a cow and gave it to his <i>aris</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');"><sup>12</sup></span>
ז ר' אלעזר מהגרוניא זבין בהמה ויהיב ליה לאריסיה מפטים ליה ויהיב ליה רישא באגריה ויהיב פלגא רווחא אמרה ליה דביתהו אי משתתפת בהדיה יהיב לך נמי אליתא אזל זבין בהדיה פליג ליה מאליתא א"ל תא נפלגיה לרישא א"ל השתא כמעיקרא נמי לא
7 The latter fattened it, and received the head in payment and also half the profit.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The arrangement having been on a fifty-fifty basis of profit or loss. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> Said his [the aris's] wife to him, 'Had you been in partnership with him, he would have given you the tail too [as your share].' So he went and bought [a cow] in partnership with him, but he [R. Eleazar] divided the tail, and then said: 'Come, let us divide the head too.' 'What! Shall I not receive even as much as before?' exclaimed he. 'Until now', he [R. Eleazar] replied, 'the money was [altogether] mine; had I not given you a little more [than half], It would have looked like usury. Now, however, we are partners: what will you plead? I have worked rather more? But people say 'The average <i>aris</i> binds himself to the landowner to find him pasture.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the slight additional work done by the aris is really an unexpressed part of his contract. ');"><sup>14</sup></span>
ח א"ל עד האידנא זוזי דידי הוו אי לא הוה יהיבנא לך טפי פורתא מיחזי כרבית השתא שותפי אנן מאי קאמרת טרחנא טפי פורתא אמרי אינשי סתם אריסא למרי ארעא קמשעבד נפשיה לאתויי ליה רעיא
8 Our Rabbis taught: If one entrusts his neighbour with cattle on a valuation,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For breeding. V. Mishnah 68a, and notes a.l. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> how long is he bound to attend thereto? Symmachus said: In the case of asses, eighteen months; small cattle,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., sheep, goats. ');"><sup>16</sup></span>
ט תנו רבנן השם בהמה לחבירו עד מתי חייב לטפל בה סומכוס אומר באתונות שמונה עשר חדש בגודרות כ"ד חדש ואם בא לחלוק בתוך זמנו חברו מעכב עליו אבל אינו דומה טיפולה של שנה זו לטיפולה של שנה אחרת
9 twenty-four months. Should he wish to divide [the profits] within this period, his partner can prevent it, but the attention of the first year cannot be compared with that of the second.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which involves greater expenditure in food. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> Why say 'but'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the contrary, this states the reason. ');"><sup>18</sup></span>
י (אבל מאי קאמר) אלא לפי שאינו דומה טיפולה של שנה זו לטיפולה של שנה אחרת
10 — Therefore [say thus]: Because the attention necessary in the first year cannot be compared with that of the second.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Therefore the owner can insist on his keeping it for two years. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> Another [Baraitha] taught: If one entrusts his neighbour with cattle on valuation, how long is he bound to attend to the young?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The young too are shared as part of the profit. Now, the breeder would naturally wish to divide immediately on birth, since he has no profit in the owner's half. ');"><sup>20</sup></span>
יא תניא אידך השם בהמה לחבירו עד מתי חייב לטפל בולדות בדקה ל' יום ובגסה נ' יום רבי יוסי אומר בדקה ג' חדשים מפני שטיפולה מרובה מאי טיפולה מרובה מפני ששיניה דקות מכאן ואילך נוטל מחצה שלו וחצי מחצה בשל חבירו
11 In the case of small cattle, thirty days; large cattle, fifty days. R. Jose said: In the case of small cattle, three months, because they need much attention. How [do they need] much attention? Because their teeth are very small.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And it is a tacit understanding that the breeder should attend to it until it needs only normal attention. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> Thereafter, he [the breeder] receives his own half [of the young] and a half of his neighbour's half.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The original arrangement to share in the profits extends to the increased value of the young which he must continue to look after as stated above, and he takes his own half complete, plus half the increased value of the owner's half. ');"><sup>22</sup></span>
יב רב מנשיא בר גדא שקל מחצה שלו וחצי מחצה בשל חבירו אתא לקמיה דאביי א"ל מאן פלג לך ועוד מקום שנהגו לגדל הוא ותנן מקום שנהגו לגדל יגדילו
12 R. Menashia b. Gada took his own half and half of his partner's half. Then he came before Abaye. Said he to him: Who divided for you?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who checked your assessment of the value of half a share? ');"><sup>23</sup></span> Moreover, the local usage here is to breed [until fully grown], and we learnt: Where it is the usage to breed, they [the young] must be fully bred.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence he is only entitled to his own half, and no more. ');"><sup>24</sup></span>
יג הנהו תרי כותאי דעבוד עסקא בהדי הדדי אזיל חד מנייהו פליג זוזי בלא דעתיה דחבריה אתו לקמיה דרב פפא א"ל מאי נפקא מינה הכי אמר רב נחמן זוזי כמאן דפליגי דמו
13 Two Cutheans<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Samaritans. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> entered on a share partnership.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in the case of breeding, one investing the money, and the other trading with it. ');"><sup>26</sup></span>
יד לשנה זבון חמרא בהדי הדדי קם אידך פליג ליה בלא דעתיה דחבריה אתו לקמיה דרב פפא א"ל מאן פלג לך א"ל קא חזינא דבתר דידי קא אתי מר א"ר פפא
14 Then one went and divided the money without his partner's knowledge. So they came before R. Papa.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This shews that though by this time Jews regarded them as Gentiles, they nevertheless submitted to Jewish jurisdiction. ');"><sup>27</sup></span> Said he to him [the plaintiff]: What difference does it make? Thus did R. Nahman rule: Monies are held to be already divided. The following year they bought wine in partnership. Thereupon the other arose and divided it without his partner's knowledge. Again they came before R. Papa. Said he to him: Who divided it for you? — I see, he replied, that you are biassed in my partner's favour.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For last year you upheld his dividing without my knowledge, but now disallow mine without his. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> Said R. Papa: